Re: Utimatte Zapper vs. Gamma Zapper.

Hello David,

That's Presner with one 's', by the way.

I have numbered our responses, below, to make it easier to follow this string.

David Etheredge: Ken Pressner posted the following on his site in regards to your post:

"The Ultimate Zapper's single low frequency produces the fastest results of any zapper. An informal zapper study on the curezone.com health forum with The Ultimate Zapper, ParaZapper, Super Deluxe and Gamma Zapper shows 1 hour with The Ultimate Zapper = 4 hours with ParaZapper. The maker of ParaZapper graciously conceded The Ultimate Zapper "may be the most powerful single frequency zapper" available."

He failed to mention that the ParaZapper used was an outdated version of the cheapest model made by ParaZapper. It is to be expected that his $169.00 model would be a little more effective than one that sold for $58.00 or so.

Ken Presner comment 1: I was not aware of which model was used in this informal study. I thought that even the cheapest ParaZappers are supposed to be effective? Otherwise why sell them? Thanks for your back-handed acknowledgment that The Ultimate Zapper would be "a little more effective" than your cheap model. That's very gracious of you. I note you have not denied saying The Ultimate Zapper "may be the most powerful single frequency zapper available." That sounds to me more than "a little more effective".

David Etheredge: He also failed to mention that it was a 1 person study. People can see that when they visit curezone.

Ken Presner comment 1: I said it was an informal study. This is nit picking. This is not the only informal study that reflects the fact that The Ultimate Zapper provides the fastest results of any zapper, by far.


You side-step the issue by not addressing this fact. Individual "anecdotes" tell quite an interesting story when confirmed by many similar anecdotes. And there are many such "anecdotes" about the very fast results people have obtained with The Ultimate Zapper. Trying to discount the importance of this informal study is a mistake because it is backed by the statements of so many others. It is impossible to discount them all without falsifying the facts.

David Etheredge: I am not surprised that he still keeps the reference to Dr. Lloyd even though Dr. Lloyd has discounted this statement himself.

Ken Presner comment 1: Dr. Loyd has never discounted this statement to me. David Etheredge reported that Dr. Loyd discounted it to him but, interestingly enough, I have never heard a word from Dr. Loyd himself that contradicts this report.

Sincerely,
Ken Presner

Tweet